What I can say is where to draw a line (as far as freedom and rights) is when killing another living being. I understand some areas that are grey but overall, if it's not a threat to a mother's life, I see no reason why it should be aborted...and then there's rape and another grey area, I still would suggest having it and then putting up for adoption as I'm sure everyone would rather be alive and a bastard than be killed.

You seem to be under the impression I'm pro-choice. I'm not. Abortion, in my eyes, is wrong. While I still think that anyone should be allowed to have children - rapists and pedophiles are exempt in this, obviously - I do believe that those NOT ready shouldn't be allowed to abort. Adoption is a more viable option. Abortion is murder.

Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul.

Unless I'm missing something from Black Wolf's post, your response appears to me to be a complete overreaction and misinterpretation. Where does anything she had said play as indicative to her thinking she's in a position to command exactly who should and should not be on birth control? Clearly her context was referring to people attempting to not conceive a child, so how in any way was her post that you've quoted egregious?

Thank you Rapture, that WAS exactly what I was saying. It's okay. If I "annoy" the dude so much, he should put me on his ignore list. Heck, he said he wasn't going to have anything to do with me. What happened to that?

You seem to be under the impression I'm pro-choice. I'm not. Abortion, in my eyes, is wrong. While I still think that anyone should be allowed to have children - rapists and pedophiles are exempt in this, obviously - I do believe that those NOT ready shouldn't be allowed to abort. Adoption is a more viable option. Abortion is murder.

I wasn't. I was just adding on to your argument by saying that the same people that don't use protection, probably most of the times end up having abortions...of course abortion can happen from many sources but a big part seems to be the younger crowd.

So while you're correct, it's everyone's right to have a child (even though sadly most of the times these youngsters may or may not care what they eat/drink during pregnancy and may even smoke), but i think that should only go as far as when they change their mind and want to abort. It should be a crime for the most part...but it's not, it's very liberal in that respect.

So I'm confused about one part in your post...you're saying that if someone is deemed not ready (young), shouldn't be allowed to have an abortion? In all cases?

Also you're saying that we should allow in all cases if it was a rapist/pedophilia case?

Good point and I had heard of that before, just forgot about it...well, what's stopping that from happening?

Stopping sex education and the availability of contraceptives?

Well, some conservatives don't even want contraceptives to be around. They just want people to use abstinence. They also want Planned Parenthood gone. They want this both from a religious-based view and a financial view, since tax dollars go towards planned parenthood and contraceptives. And the argument is that they don't want to 'pay for people to have sex'.

Also, the quality of each country's education system comes into play as well.

My brother in law thought he was going to be clever and wear boxers the day after. HUGE mistake. He called me and asked me what to do about the pain. He wasn't convinced the jock strap was the solution, but turns out when you're that sore and tender the last thing you want is for the boys to be swinging around and bouncing into each other.

Keep them confined and secure, it's the best way to avoid unnecessary pain.

+rep to you.

Thanks for all the info. My wife is currently pregnant with twins. We're still debating what we're gonna do afterwards, but if we choose not to have anymore, then at least I'm informed. I'm really hesitant to do this, but at the same time, I've heard it's a lot safer and easier than a woman getting her tubes tied. And I'm the kind of guy who says, "If it's for my wife, and it means less pain/hardship for her, I'll gladly do it. But this is the one thing that really has me nervous

Well, some conservatives don't even want contraceptives to be around. They just want people to use abstinence. They also want Planned Parenthood gone. They want this both from a religious-based view and a financial view, since tax dollars go towards planned parenthood and contraceptives. And the argument is that they don't want to 'pay for people to have sex'.

Also, the quality of each country's education system comes into play as well.

But I get that argument...even if it's not realistic and counter-productive.

It's the same as not treating someone for cancer and instead trying to get rid of things that may cause cancer. The issue is that we're too far into it where it's going to be difficult to go back so instead we should focus on treating people rather than denying them because they did something.

Then we need more education. High schools need to make sex ed mandatory to graduate.

That is true, the girls could be lying about taking birth control. 1% isn't enough to where the teen preg rate should be this high.

But why wouldn't a girl want to take birth control? It's not painful or anything.

I'm not trying to look down on my classmates and other girls, but I just don't get it. I'm one of the very few girls of my color in my class without a child.

Schools should still educate the children on sex but there is only so much you can do. Growing up is tough and many people learn the hard way, they do stuff and it bites them in the ass, that is how a lot of this Sex education came out in the first place. It's like climbing a latter 400 ft up in the air, now the person above you hasn't looked down but you happen to look down. You say...oh $#@!, don't look down... but the person looks down anyway and starts freaking out. It's not that they don't listen, it's the point at that time they just don't think about it. Some teens want a baby and I think this stems of playing with dolls at a young age, caring for dolls, then they want a real baby. The need to want evolvs more and more.

I don't consider it harsh, I consider it just. Pedophiles and rapists are the scummiest people on this planet and shouldn't even be allowed to have the parts necessary to produce children. Castrate them and you're effectively stripping them of their weapons. Such a punishment is far more fitting than death which, in my eyes, is the easy way out for them. They can struggle on through life and not do anything about their lust. I feel no remorse or sympathy for them whatsoever.

As for your latter comment, I agree with you entirely. As mentioned before, I'm extremely against abortion. You are, in effect, killing a human being. That is, for all intents and purpose, murder and should, in my opinion, be punishable. Killing an unborn baby is no different to getting in a car and mowing down a child in the street. Why should the latter result in a jail sentence but not the former? As I mentioned, however, only in certain cases -- if the child was in danger, for instance -- should abortion even be considered but even then, all you'd need is social services keep watch and then remove the child when it's born.

Loyalty to petrified opinion never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul.

Why is that necessary? The difference is pretty obvious. A child is already born and living its life, capable of consciousness, capable of making decisions, capable of feeling pain and terror (among other emotions that would come in the face of death), assigns its own existence with worth, and is valuable to both its family and society. A fetus is none of those things. It's fine if you think a fetus is valuable, but I'm saying it's not as valuable as a child who's already here. There's a massive difference between the two.

Why is that necessary? The difference is pretty obvious. A child is already born and living its life, capable of consciousness, capable of making decisions, capable of feeling pain and terror (among other emotions that would come in the face of death), assigns its own existence with worth, and is valuable to both its family and society. A fetus is none of those things. It's fine if you think a fetus is valuable, but I'm saying it's not as valuable as a child who's already here. There's a massive difference between the two.

That's a weak argument…1) The baby hasn't done most of that when it's born. Which begs the question? 2) Do you feel an 8-11 year old is more wroth than an infant? As clearly the latter has done all of the criteria you have laid out.

I'm curious however about one thing, you did answer part of the question I was going to ask you when you said "fetus" but what is your opinion on how far it is ok to kill an unborn child?

not to mention, none of us should have the right to decide about an unborn child - again this is after given that the mother's life wouldn't be in danger. When you were at a certain stage in your development in the womb, would you also think that you weren't as much worth as you are now? You'd be ok if you were killed before you could feel pain/terror or the rest of your criteria?

Originally Posted by Jaeger

I don't consider it harsh, I consider it just. Pedophiles and rapists are the scummiest people on this planet and shouldn't even be allowed to have the parts necessary to produce children. Castrate them and you're effectively stripping them of their weapons. Such a punishment is far more fitting than death which, in my eyes, is the easy way out for them. They can struggle on through life and not do anything about their lust. I feel no remorse or sympathy for them whatsoever.

I understand but the only reason I said that is because if you feel that way about every one of them then do you think that it should happen to all the members that were caught on that "Predator" show?

That's a weak argument…1) The baby hasn't done most of that when it's born. Which begs the question? 2) Do you feel an 8-11 year old is more wroth than an infant? As clearly the latter has done all of the criteria you have laid out.

No, it's not a weak argument. It's actually quite rational and coherent. Of course the fetus hasn't done that since it hasn't been born, that's my entire point. And yes, an older child will be 'worth' more than an infant in some regards. But the disparity between the two is less than that of a living person and as fetus.

Originally Posted by Sufi

I'm curious however about one thing, you did answer part of the question I was going to ask you when you said "fetus" but what is your opinion on how far it is ok to kill an unborn child?

My opinion? I think if someone is going to get an abortion then it should be done as quickly as possible. Obviously as you approach the birth period and development becomes more advanced the notion of killing it does become sketchier overall. As for the cut-off line for abortions? That's a big ray area, and even doctors, scientists and biologists can't really agree. A fair argument is that it should at least be done before cognition and brain activity become common, which is around 24 weeks. This is also around when a fetus has a 50% survival chance outside of the womb (though not without potential growth issues afterwards). This is 5.5 months into the pregnancy, which should be plenty of time for people to make their decisions on whether to keep it or not.

Originally Posted by Sufi

not to mention, none of us should have the right to decide about an unborn child

Personally I don't feel I have the right to tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body. I prioritize the rights of the living above the potential rights of a fetus.

Originally Posted by Sufi

When you were at a certain stage in your development in the womb, would you also think that you weren't as much worth as you are now? You'd be ok if you were killed before you could feel pain/terror or the rest of your criteria?

This is such a sympathy argument. How does this even function as a debate piece anyways? If I was a fetus, I wouldn't be capable of thinking about this. If I had been aborted then I simply wouldn't be here to consider the idea at all. You're trying to view this from multiple moments in time to fit your argument, but that's simply not how reality works. And yes, myself as a fetus is definitely 'worth' less than who and what I am now. That's just obvious.

No, it's not a weak argument. It's actually quite rational and coherent. Of course the fetus hasn't done that since it hasn't been born, that's my entire point. And yes, an older child will be 'worth' more than an infant in some regards. But the disparity between the two is less than that of a living person and as fetus.

What is your reasoning behind why an older child would have more “valueable” than an infant?

My opinion? I think if someone is going to get an abortion then it should be done as quickly as possible. Obviously as you approach the birth period and development becomes more advanced the notion of killing it does become sketchier overall. As for the cut-off line for abortions? That's a big ray area, and even doctors, scientists and biologists can't really agree. A fair argument is that it should at least be done before cognition and brain activity become common, which is around 24 weeks. This is also around when a fetus has a 50% survival chance outside of the womb (though not without potential growth issues afterwards). This is 5.5 months into the pregnancy, which should be plenty of time for people to make their decisions on whether to keep it or not.

Well that wasn’t your opinion, was it? Unless your opinion is the same as the scientists.
So you think it’s ok to kill a unborn child around 5.5 months? Terrifying.

Personally I don't feel I have the right to tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body. I prioritize the rights of the living above the potential rights of a fetus.

Except it’s not her body, is it? It’s also a child’s.
You’re also going to have to come up with a better term than “living” as both the mother and the fetus are living…so that wouldn’t work. I think you mean to say the rights of anyone outside the womb or over 5.5 months in the womb, above the potential rights of a fetus.

This is such a sympathy argument. How does this even function as a debate piece anyways? If I was a fetus, I wouldn't be capable of thinking about this. If I had been aborted then I simply wouldn't be here to consider the idea at all. You're trying to view this from multiple moments in time to fit your argument, but that's simply not how reality works. And yes, myself as a fetus is definitely 'worth' less than who and what I am now. That's just obvious.

So because you weren’t capable of thinking about it, means that you’re not entitled to have full rights to be potentially alive?

How would this be any different from a person who can't think for themselves because they're mentally challenged? It's possible that a person may not be able to pass any of the criteria you've laid out.

It all just seems too much dependent on what your opinion is and not thinking about other perspectives or real world situations. That’s not fitting the argument to me, that’s looking at a situation from different shoes.

So you’re telling me that if you wanted a child, and your wife suddenly says at 5.5 months that she doesn’t want it. You’d be perfectly fine with it?

So you’re telling me that if you wanted a child, and your wife suddenly says at 5.5 months that she doesn’t want it. You’d be perfectly fine with it?

This is something that annoys me. Those who are Pro-Choice are not Pro-Abortion. Abortion is a difficult issue and a grey area. Those who are Pro-Choice just feel that decision should be left up to the woman instead of the government. When in doubt, give the power to the people.

This is something that annoys me. Those who are Pro-Choice are not Pro-Abortion. Abortion is a difficult issue and a grey area. Those who are Pro-Choice just feel that decision should be left up to the woman instead of the government. When in doubt, give the power to the people.

Are you agreeing with me or disagreeing with me?

If you are disagreeing with me, do you feel that the choice should be left to the people in all cases?

Posting Permissions

PlayStation Universe

Copyright 2006-2014 7578768 Canada Inc. All Right Reserved.

Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written
permission of Abstract Holdings International Ltd. prohibited.Use of this site is governed
by our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.